Geoff Gannon August 11, 2019

How Safe Can You Really Make a 5-Stock Portfolio?

By GEOFF GANNON

Investors often overestimate the reduction in volatility they will get from diversification and underestimate the reduction in volatility they will get from simply owning stocks with a beta less than 1.

Over the last 10-11 years, I’ve owned 5 or fewer stocks in about 90%+ of all quarters. My portfolio’s returns have had a lower standard deviation in terms of returns than the S&P 500. And in terms of just “downside volatility” – which is what most investors mean when they say volatility (they aren’t bothered by big moves to the upside – only the downside) – the difference is even larger.

I’m sure there’s an element of luck to that. And, historically, I hadn’t intentionally focused on low beta stocks. Though – on average – my stocks would have always had lower betas than the market.

I’ve run a portfolio for over a decade with 5 stocks that had less volatility than a portfolio (the S&P 500) with 500 stocks. So, whatever the theoretical math is – I can tell you that in real world performance having 1/100th the number of positions if they have 8/10ths or 2/3rds or half the beta or whatever may end up being no more volatile than the overall market.

If you go from 5 to 500 positions – you will basically go to a beta of 1 (it will be 1 if the 500 are the S&P 500). If you are getting 50%+ of the diversification benefit from just 5 positions – I’m not sure how likely you can improve on reducing the volatility of your portfolio by increasing the number of stocks you hold (because you’d have to find other low beta stocks to keep the beta of your individual stocks lower than the market).

I don’t pay attention much to diversification, beta, etc. But, if you are looking to reduce volatility – especially downside volatility – without reducing returns (and especially without lowering the chance you outperform the market in the long-run) all the research I’ve seen would suggest that holding fewer positions with lower betas would do more for an investor than holding more positions with betas closer to 1. Of course, holding a lot of stocks all with low beta would reduce volatility the most.

So, I don’t think diversifying into more stocks with higher betas actually reduces volatility as much as individual investors expect it too. These investors overestimate the importance of diversification in reducing volatility and underestimate the importance of simply owing low volatility (low beta) stocks.

Does that mean there’s no point to diversifying?

Actually, I think most investors will feel much better diversifying. This is not because their portfolio with more stocks will be a lot less volatile. It’s because diversification has 4 main psychological benefits:

1) It may make some investors more likely to just let some positions sit there. If an investor has only 3, 4, or 5 positions – he …

Geoff Gannon August 5, 2019

Innovative Food Holdings (IVFH): Specialty Food Distributor Trading At Sharp Discount To Larger Peers, Attracting Activist Attention

Writeup by Thomas Niel

Innovative Food Holdings (OTC: IVFH), is a micro-cap specialty foods distributor selling at a sharp discount to its peers. This discount is not irrational, as the company has two material risks:

IVFH is dependent on a third-party (US Foods) to distribute its specialty food products to restaurants and other food service customers. This contract is year-to-year, but limits the company’s appeal as a takeover candidate to US Foods’s rivals.
IVFH has made two acquisitions in order to diversify into the e-commerce space. Given IVFH’s lackluster M&A track record, investors assume this current endeavor will not pay off for shareholders.

The investing public have conveyed their displeasure via a large sell off in IVFH shares in the past 18 months. But in the chaos, one activist investor sees opportunity. James Pappas’s JCP Investment Management has acquired more than 10% of outstanding shares.

Will this activist be able to help realize IVFH’s intrinsic value? Is the business truly undervalued, or is the current market discount rational? Are there strategic or financial buyers out there to buy out IVFH, or at least buy its non-core units? Read on to see if IVFH presents a strong opportunity for your portfolio!

Background

Innovative Food Holdings is largely the creation of its CEO, Sam Klepfish. Klepfish previously worked in small-cap investment banking before taking the reins at IVFH in 2006. In the past 13 years, he has built the business via roll-up acquisitions. Some of these deals have worked, while others (The Fresh Diet) have destroyed shareholder value.

Company History

Innovative Food Holdings formed in 2004, the result of a reverse merger between public shell Fiber Application Systems Technology and privately-held Innovative Food Holdings. Subsequent to this creation, IFVH acquired Food Innovations in an all-stock deal.

In 2012, IFVH acquired Artisan Specialty Foods for $1.2m, as well as The Haley Group, a brand management company.

In 2014, IFVH merged with The Fresh Diet, Inc. in a $14m all-stock transaction. This deal proved to be a bust, with IVFH selling 90% of the unit to its former founder in 2016.

Since 2014, several bolt-on acquisitions have followed:

2014: Organic Food Brokers

2017: Oasis Sales and Marketing

2018: iGourmet

2018: Mouth Foods

Operating Segments

IVFH operates through these several units, covering several areas of the specialty foods industry (distribution, eCommerce, Brand Management).

Distribution (Direct To Chef)

IVFH’s Food Innovations, Inc. business is heavily supported by its logistics partner, US Foods Inc. Via its deal with US Foods, the company is able to source niche food products, then distribute them to end users (restaurants, hotels, casinos, hospitals, and other food service buyers) within 24-72 hours.

The distribution segment focuses on the gourmet side of the niche food business.Through Food Innovations and Artisan Specialty Foods, IFVH distributes over 7,000 perishable and specialty food and food products (including delicacies such as alligator and antelope). This segment produced 79% of revenues in 2018.

e-Commerce

Since 2018, IVFH has …

Geoff Gannon July 15, 2019

Truxton (TRUX): A One-Branch Nashville Private Bank and Wealth Manager Growing 10% a Year and Trading at a P/E of 14

by GEOFF GANNON

Truxton (TRUX) is an illiquid, micro-cap bank stock. TRUX is not listed on any stock exchange. It trades “over-the-counter”. And it does not file with the SEC.

The bank has two locations (one in Nashville, Tennessee and one in Athens, Georgia). However, only one location (the Nashville HQ) is actually a bank branch. So, I’m going to be calling Truxton a “one branch” bank despite it having two wealth management locations.

The company doesn’t file with the SEC. But, it is not a true “dark” stock. It has a perfectly nice website with an “investor information” section that includes quarterly earnings releases.

Still, if Truxton doesn’t file with the SEC – how can I find enough information to write an article about it?

Truxton – as a U.S. bank – does file reports with the FDIC even though it doesn’t file with the SEC. So, some of the information in this article will be taken from the company’s own – very brief – releases to shareholders (which are not filed with the SEC) while other information is taken from the company’s reports to the FDIC. Truxton also puts out a quarterly newsletter that sometimes provides information I might talk about here. Those 3 sources taken together add up to the portrait of the company I’ll be painting here. Some other info is taken from Glassdoor, local press reports, etc. But, that’s mostly just color.

So, it is possible to research Truxton despite it being a stock that doesn’t file with the SEC.

But, is it possible to actually buy enough Truxton shares to make a difference to your portfolio?

It depends. Are you an individual investor or a fund manager? Do you have a big portfolio or a small portfolio? And – most importantly – are you willing to take a long time to build up a position in a stock and then hold that stock pretty much forever?

No shareholder of any size would have an easy time getting out of Truxton stock quickly. But, if you intended to stick with the company for the long haul – it is possible, if you take your time buying up the position, for individual investors to get enough TRUX shares.

The math works like this…

Truxton shares are illiquid but not un-investable. In an average month, there might be around $300,000 worth of shares trading hands. Let’s round that down to $250,000 to be conservative. Let’s say you can buy 20% of the total volume of shares traded in a stock without much disturbing the price. That’s one-fifth of $250,000 equals $50,000. So, let’s say you can put $50,000 a month into Truxton stock without anyone noticing. That’s $150,000 per quarter, $300,000 every six months, and $600,000 over a year. Most investors don’t put much more than 10% of their portfolio in a single stock. So, if you’re willing to take up to a year to buy it – Truxton is investable for anyone with an account of …

Geoff Gannon July 12, 2019

Jubilee Holdings Ltd: East Africa’s Largest and Most Profitable Insurer is Hidden Behind a Thinly Traded Stock

Jubilee Holdings Ltd: East Africa’s Largest and Most Profitable Insurance Company Is Hidden Behind a Thinly Traded Stock

By John M. Kamara

JUBI(Ticker Symbol – “JUBI” in Nairobi) is an insurance holding company listed on the Nairobi Stock Exchange since 1985 that owns and operates an 82 year old insurance operation across the East African region. As of June 28, 2019 the company has a market cap of US$290million (Ksh29 billion). In my view, the stock offers a decent investment opportunity for a buy-and-hold type investor because of the businesses quality combined with the discounted price the shares seem to trade at. I believe this price is available because of an “illiquidity discount”.

Incorporated in 1937, Jubilee Insurance was the first local Insurance Co set up as one of the initiatives by the then Imam of the Nizari Ismaili to revive the East African economies following the world recession of 1932. Sir Sultan Mohamed Shah Aga Khan III was the 48^th heteridtary Imam of the Nizari Ismaili which is a branch of the Islam faith commonly referred to as the Nizari’s. The “Nizari’s’’ are a global, multi-ethnic community whose members are citizens from many parts of the globe.

This ‘group’ is involved in development, social and economic work through the Aga Khan Development Network (AKDN) that in turn carries out its activities through a multiplicity of its agencies. Its agencies are involved in sectors ranging from education to health, finance and even investment.

The AKDN is currently under the leadership of His Highness Aga Khan IV, the 49^th Imam of the Ismaili Muslims who is the grandson of the Sultan.

The insurance company was one of the many business interests the AKDN would establish or invest in as part of their wider goal to improve the “quality of lives of the people/community” through its agency, the Aga Khan Fund for Economic Development (AKFED). This agency has been investing in for-profit businesses over the decades with potential to improve the lives of the members of the communities the businesses operate in. This type of investing has been more recently been termed Social Impact Investing (SII).

So in 1937, the Aga Khan called together a few prominent Ismailis from all over East Africa to join him start a local insurance company. The Company began with a small office in downtown Mombasa and today is now the largest composite insurer in East and Central Africa with annual premiums of $US 260million and $US670 million in float as of year 2018.

The listed company is an insurance holding company, Jubilee Holdings Limited (JUBI: NAI) which underwrites general, life and pension business through majority owned subsidiaries in Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Burundi and Mauritius. Its subsidiaries, whose businesses are split into General (what is more commonly referred to as Property & Casualty in many parts of the developed world) and Life Insurance companies, all rank in the top 3 or 4 in market share in their respective jurisdictions. In addition, JUBI began operations in …

Geoff Gannon July 1, 2019

United Plantations: A Low-Cost Palm Oil Producer with 11 to 17% Returns on Equity and Excellent Capital Allocation

by WARWICK BAGNALL

United Plantations Berhad (KLSE:UTDPLT, UP for the sake of brevity) is an integrated palm oil plantation, milling and refining company (plus a small coconut plantation). It’s currently too expensive for me to buy but it is a company that I would like to own if the price ever drops to an acceptable level.

Superficially, there are a lot of reasons why palm oil companies look like a bad investment. Like all agricultural commodities, the price of palm oil fluctuates a lot. There’s the risk of pests, disease or unfavourable weather events. A significant amount of palm oil is used for biofuel so there is some regulatory risk associated with reduction of biofuel subsidies or an outright ban of biofuel. Many people have concerns about the health impact of consuming palm oil. And the industry has had a lot of bad press regarding forest clearing, peat fires and loss of wildlife habitat.

I have some pretty strong views on these areas. For full disclosure I previously worked in the vegetable oil industry (including palm oil milling) and still do a small amount of work for a palm fruit milling machinery company. So you could say that I’m biased but I have at least seen what goes on at well managed mills in Malaysia, Indonesia and PNG. My opinion is that most of the bad publicity is undeserved and that unless people everywhere decide to accept a major downgrade in their diet and standard of living, palm oil is going to be part of our diet for the foreseeable future.

Previously, most of the hard fats in our diet came from animal fats such as tallow, lard and milk fat. Vegetarianism (and also halal and kosher requirements) made the first of those two unacceptable for many consumer products and veganism reduced the addressable market for the third. For a period, hydrogenated seed oil (mostly soy) provided an acceptable alternative. Unfortunately, health concerns regarding trans fat meant that hydrogenated oils became unpopular. That left palm. For a large food manufacturer or restaurant chain seeking an oil which makes baked goods fatty (but not oily) or fried food crispy, the oil which will offend the least number of customers from a dietary and religious point of view is palm.

Palm oil (and palm kernel oil) are also very versatile (compared to the main industrial oils) in terms of producing specialty products. The oil can be fractionated simply by chilling it until part of the fat solidifies and filtering the solids out from the liquid. The wide range of fatty acids in the oil make it useful for oleochemicals such as soaps and emulsifiers. It’s currently a very cheap oil – that might not continue in the future. But it will probably always be the easiest oil to manufacture many specialty products from.

In terms of the environmental impact, palm has much less impact than other oils when managed correctly. Palm oil uses a fraction of the area …

Geoff Gannon June 23, 2019

Tailored Brands (TLRD): Operating at the Focal-Point of the Retail Apocalypse and the Hedge Fund Armageddon, TLRD is a Stable Company With a P/E of 3

by JONATHAN DANIELSON

Tailored Brands is the company behind the brand names Men’s Wearhouse (MW) and Jos. A Bank (JOSB). As you can probably guess, Tailored Brands operates in the specialty retail industry. More specifically, they provide the younger-to-older middle-class male demographic with suitwear. Broadly speaking, their portfolio of clothing includes suits, sport coats, slacks, business casual, outerwear, dress shirts, shoes and accessories.

I don’t want readers to be misled by the title of this article since I labeled the company as “stable”: Tailored Brands is a high-risk stock. I classify Tailored Brands as a stable company because if you take a look at the company’s stock chart, you’ll see that over the course of the past year TLRD is about 85% off its highs. The stock was trading at $30/share as recently as June of last year. It’s at $5/share now. With a drop that dramatic you would usually expect to find one or more of a few things going on with the company. You would probably expect sales or earnings to be down quite materially. Or you’d expect to find impending liquidity issues. But that’s not necessarily what we find here. Top-line consolidated sales since 2015 are basically flat. Operating income is up 20% since then. Whether or not these are good numbers doesn’t matter right now. At least initially, the business doesn’t seem to have fallen off a cliff; yet the stock certainly has. So why is the stock high-risk? Well, a lot of reasons. One factor that adds to the riskiness of the situation also makes the stock look cheaper. All of you reading this can probably guess what I’m referring to: leverage. Despite aggressively paying down debt over the previous few years the company is still saddled with debt that equates to 3x EBITDA. Anytime you have a business where the popular sentiment is that the business is possibly facing a secular decline (i.e. the market is not too hot about the company’s growth prospects) and you add a highly-levered balance sheet to the mix you tend to get a stock that looks ridiculously “cheap” on standard valuation metrics. These dynamics make the stock high-risk.

Geoff recently wrote-up Farmer Mac (Ticker: AGM) on this site. If you haven’t read that post yet, you should go do it before reading on. In his write up of the Company he said, “An investor interested in Farmer Mac should spend 95%+ of his time worrying about the risks.” And why is that? Why spend so much time pondering the risks of the stock? Because, in his case, the stock he was evaluating was far, far too cheap for the quality of the business. So the only question relevant to investors is: what are the potential catastrophic risks? Will the company survive? If the Company survives then the stock should be a homerun.

I think Tailored Brands is very much the same. It’s not that I’m not making the argument that a specialty retailer is …

Geoff Gannon June 16, 2019

NACCO (NC): A Contract Coal Miner with Stable Inflation Linked Profit Per Ton, a P/E of 10, a Strong Moat, and No Leverage

by STEPHEN GAMBLE

Overview

NACCO is primarily a services company, in the guise of a coal mining company, deriving all of its revenues from its US operations. It provides the service of managing mines and delivering raw materials – coal and limestone – to several large customers on a cost-plus basis on long term contracts. It has mines in several southern US states, HQ in Texas, and its two largest coal mines by coal volume, are in North Dakota. In the Q1 19 earnings call, it changed its reporting structure, to now report its business in three segments:

Coal Mining (coal extraction)
North American Mining (limestone extraction, and one sand/gravel mine just opened)
Minerals Management (oil and gas royalties)

Coal and limestone/limestone are mined in two distinct ways: Consolidated mining means that NACCO owns the mine, pays all the costs, assumes the liability for reclamation, and sells the coal on the open market and so is subject to the coal spot price. There is now only one consolidated coal mine: the Mississippi Lignite Mining Company (MLMC), after the shutdown of various mines under the Centennial Natural Resources subsidiary at the end of 2015. Unconsolidated mining means that NACCO operates the mine, and is paid a fee per tonne of coal/cubic yard of limestone mined, under cost-plus, inflation-linked long term contracts. The customers assume most of the risks and the long-term obligations of operating the mines, paying for equipment, mine reclamation responsibilities, and all other costs. Therefore, NACCO is not exposed to the coal spot price or the price of limestone under these contracts. The gross profit/tonne for these mines is very stable – less than a standard deviation of 6% over the last seven years. Most of NACCO’s profits come from unconsolidated mining, and most of these from coal mining rather than limestone mining. Other coal companies may hedge their exposure to the coal spot price: instead NACCO avoids this risk by selling to the customer for an agreed profit margin. This also reduces the price variations for NACCO’s customers. The image above shows the gross profit/ton of unconsolidated coal over the last seven years, and also the tons of unconsolidated coal mined/share, which has been increasing due to an expansion in unconsolidated coal mining.

In the last seven years, an average 76% of profits came from long term contracts for mining principally coal and limestone (unconsolidated mines), 15% of its profits from royalties for oil/gas extraction on land it leases/owns, and 9% of profits from consolidated coal mines. There are various types of coal: NACCO almost exclusively mines lignite, which is the lowest quality coal, with a low energy density per ton. Therefore, it does not pay to transport it any significant distance, so coal fired power stations tend to be co-located with the lignite mines. This is the case for most of the mines that NACCO operates. Coal is mined exclusively from surface strip mines – this creates large open scars in the landscape that have to …

Geoff Gannon June 10, 2019

ServiceMaster (SERV): Terminix is a Wide Moat Serial Acquirer of Pest Control Companies That’s Well Worth Adding to Your Watchlist

by JONATHAN DANIELSON

ServiceMaster spun-off their home warranty segment, principally the American Home Shield brand, under the new corporate guise “frontdoor, inc.” back in October of 2018. This spin did not garner a lot of attention from the value investing community as both the RemainCo (SERV) and the NewCo (FTDR) were easily discernible high-quality businesses and both parts were going to be about the same size business at about $1.5 – $2 billion in revenue. In other words, not particularly fertile grounds for a mispricing and not what most event-driven value investors look for. Now that we’re about 7 months post-spin, with both entities trading at high-teens EBITDA multiples, they both appear fully valued by my eye. There was quite a bit of volatility in between, as Q4 proved to be a particularly hostile environment for spin-offs of all shapes and sizes so it was possible to pick both up at bargain prices (for the quality of the businesses) if you were paying close enough attention – not so much at today’s prices.

So Why Am I Looking?

Despite ServiceMaster and frontdoor not appearing quantitatively cheap on valuation metrics, the reason I think it’s worth studying up on both companies is fairly simple. Both, at first glance, appear to be extremely attractive companies as they each dominate their respective markets and possess especially compelling corporate-level economics. I’ll go over the multitude of reasons it appears to me ServiceMaster is an above-average business in this write-up. Furthermore, it certainly does not take neck-breaking, earth-shattering primary analysis to ascertain that we’re in the late stages of the current cycle. As such, now seems as good a time as any to be adding quality-type businesses trading at quality-type business prices in order to capture the opportunity if a broader market sell-off emerges. As such, let’s start with ServiceMaster.

Overview – The Company Has Been Around A Long, Long Time

ServiceMaster has been around since the late 1930s. Granted, this is somewhat in name only as the company has acquired and divested many businesses over the ensuing decades; although, the business has always operated in the cleaning residential services industry. The company was originally founded as a mothproofing business by Marion Wade – a minor league baseball player at the time. The company quickly switched gears and got into the carpet cleaning business in the 1930s. ServiceMaster experienced a good deal of success throughout that decade and began franchising its brand in the 1940s for residential and on-site carpet cleaning. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s – the era which the ServiceMaster brand really become a household name – ServiceMaster expanded into hospital maintenance. By the mid-1970s ServiceMaster had sold in excess of 1,000 franchise licenses in its consumer cleaning division, and the Company’s health care division had won cleaning contracts with more than 460 hospitals and was growing rapidly. By the mid-1980s with hospitals reducing their budgets to implement cost controls as well as government regulations making it a continually less appealing …

Geoff Gannon June 4, 2019

Games Workshop (GAW): The Wide Moat, Formerly Mismanaged Company Behind “Warhammer 40,000” Has Always Had Great IP And Now Finally Has the Right Strategy

WRITE-UP BY PHILIP HUTCHINSON

Overview

Games Workshop Group plc (“GAW” or “GW”) – which trades in London under the ticker “GAW” – is by far and away the dominant publisher of tabletop wargames and designer, producer and retailer of miniatures used in those wargames. The company itself would describe its business as the design, production and sale of model soldiers that serve the “hobby” of collecting, modelling, painting and gaming with model soldiers. This is strictly true, but does not do justice to the company’s products. This is because the “model soldiers” are based on the belligerents in the company’s two major fantasy settings, Warhammer Age of Sigmar (fantasy) and Warhammer 40,000 (science fiction).

It’s easiest to demonstrate this visually, with a photo of one of the miniatures from Games Workshop’s range:

This miniature is a Primaris Space Marine. Space Marines are GW’s single most iconic creations – armies of elite, genetically engineered superhumans wearing power armour and dedicated to defending humanity in a hostile galaxy filled with forces bent on humanity’s destruction. The full GW model range is simply vast though, which you can get an idea of by visiting the company’s web pages at www.games-workshop.com, www.warhammer-community.com and www.forgeworld.com. The key point here is that GW’s “model soldiers” have much more in common with the kind of thing you’d find in a sci-fi franchise like Star Trek, Star Wars, or Alien, than they do with real life.

You should understand that if you went and bought the model above (or any of GW’s range), they would come unassembled and unpainted. (The model above was assembled and painted by a member of GW’s design studio.) Assembling and painting the models are key parts of the hobby. The other key part is using those models in tabletop wargames for which GW publishes and maintains rulesets.

GW earns revenue from selling models (such as those above – though its full range is absolutely vast), modelling tools, paints, boxed games, rules books and rules supplements, gaming accessories such as dice and templates, and scenery, all for games set in its two main fantasy settings. Sales are made through GW’s network of company stores, independent stockists, and online. GW also licences its IP to third parties to earn royalty income. The main source of royalty income is for video games set in GW’s fantasy settings. In addition, GW has a publishing arm that earns revenue from publishing novels and other fiction set in the Warhammer and Warhammer 40k universes.

The key thing to understand is that GW services the all-encompassing hobby of collecting, assembling, painting and then wargaming with miniature soldiers. There are no direct quoted peers. This is because GW is by far the biggest company in its industry. It dominates the industry the same way Tandy Leather Factory dominates leathercrafting (arguably more so, as GW is a global business). There are some peer companies out there – companies like Privateer, Battlefront, and Mantic. …

Geoff Gannon May 27, 2019

“Farmer Mac” A.K.A. Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation (AGM): The Freddie Mac of Farms and Ranches Has a P/E Below 9 and an ROE Above Most Banks

This is one of my “initial interest posts”. But, in this case it’s going to be more of an initial-initial interest post. I am in the early stages of learning about this company. And it’s likely to take me some time to get to the point where I can give as definitive a verdict on whether or not I’d follow up on the stock as I normally give in these posts.

First, let’s start with the obvious. As you probably guessed from the name, “Farmer Mac” is a government sponsored enterprise like Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae – except it operates in the agricultural instead of the residential market. The company has two main lines of business – again, this is just like the Freddie Mac business model except transplanted into the agricultural mortgage market – of 1) Buying agricultural (that is, farm and ranch) mortgages and 2) Guaranteeing agricultural (that is, farm and ranch) mortgages.

As a government sponsored enterprise operating in the secondary market for mortgages – the company has the two competitive advantages you’d expect. One, it has a lower cost of funds (on non-deposit money) because it issues debt that bond buyers treat as being ultimately akin to government debt. The same bond buyer might be willing to accept a 2.45% yield on a 10-Year U.S. Treasury bond and just a 3% yield on a Farmer Mac bond. This cost above the rate the U.S. government borrows at is much narrower for Farmer Mac than it is for most banks that make agricultural loans.

The other cost advantage is scale. Yes, there are banks – like Frost (CFR) – that have very low financial funding costs. But, these banks usually have to invest in hiring a lot of employees to build a lot of relationships, to provide customer service to retain customers, etc. that leads to a “total cost of funding” that is higher than what Farmer Mac has to pay. To put this in perspective, Frost’s deposits are basically the same as its earning assets (loans it makes plus bonds it buys). Frost has about $200 million in deposits per branch. This isn’t a bad number – it’s 1.5 times the deposits per branch of Wells Fargo and 2 times the deposits per branch of U.S. Bancorp (and more like 3-4 times the entire U.S. banking industry’s deposits per branch). Frost’s deposits per branch are pretty close to industry leading for a big bank. So, we can use that $200 million in deposits they have and assume a bank will almost never have more than $200 million in assets – because it doesn’t have more than $200 million in deposits – per branch. Farmer Mac has $200 million in assets per employee.

As a rule, one employee is going to cost you a lot less than one branch.

To put this in perspective, most banks spend more on rent relative to their assets than Farmer Mac spends on everything relative to its assets.…

Posts By: Geoff Gannon

Writeup by Thomas Niel

Background

Company History

Operating Segments

Distribution (Direct To Chef)

e-Commerce

Overview